A new research project from ASICS is exploring how much of an impact perception of effort can have on athletes 

Last December, AW travelled down to Seville to witness a new research project by ASICS on the perception of effort. The purpose of the experiment was to discover the relationship between how athletes run and their perception of effort, physically and mentally, focusing on the impact of pacing. 

For the experiment, ASICS created a 600m lap with asphalt surface at the Plaza de America. When elite athletes from ASICS ran on the circuit, wearing the new METASPEED Series the METASPEED SKY PARIS and the METASPEED EDGE PARIS they were either running at a constant pace or one which varied. The aim was to establish their perception of effort during both types of pace and to, crucially, understand their physical and mental states in response to changes in speed. 

During the 10km runs, athletes passed the ASICS Institute of Sport Science team (ISS), who asked athletes to shout a number based on a large scale which visualised numbers 0-10, located on the inside of the track just before the finish straight. For example, if an athlete shouted 0 then they perceived themselves to be putting no effort into their run, whereas 10 would be the maximum. 

To learn more about the experiment and its importance, AW spoke to Professor Samuele Marcora, who worked with ASICS on the project and specialises in the interplay between physiology and psychology of athletes. 

What was the idea/inspiration behind the experiment and whats the impact of perception of effort? 

Ive been involved with ASICS since 2018 and their philosophy is to help everyone achieve a sound mind in a sound body. 

Im an expert in that field and during any exercise, certainly running, one of the best ways to judge the relationship between an athletes mind and body is through perception of effort. 

The research question for this project came from ASICS ISS team and that came from work theyd be doing for a while. They wanted to test the self-regulation of athletes speed and the behaviours associated with them. How did the change in pace in a race impact their perception of effort? Was there any correlation? 

To test the behaviours of athletes, we split the experiment into sections and started with an even pacing strategy. Thats basically maintaining the same pace throughout the race. The other one was adding a variable. So the average speed is the same but the behaviours are different as sometimes the pace of the race will fluctuate. We were careful not to induce any expectations of the athletes as we didnt have any ourselves.

Theres not much literature in running which has tested this kind of thing beforehand. The science states that the optimal pacing strategy is an even one. The problem is, its very tricky to nail it. To decide the optimal pace you can maintain in the race from the start is extremely difficult as an athlete. 

In longer races, like a marathon or half-marathon, the best runners have a more even pace than lower level athletes. Of course, during races especially at an elite level there are a lot of tactics. Comparing even versus variable pace, we wanted to explain why that if you attempt your personal best, its probable that the pace will be as even as possible.

We also wanted to see how the ability to vary the pace, which may be something youd get at a championships instead of going for a personal best, impacted athletes. Following on from that, we then aimed to look at how perception of effort relates to performance when a race is tactical, studying if there are athletes who can vary pace without suffering too much. 

Could you explain more about the scale that measured perception of effort? 

So zero is no effort, three corresponds to moderate, seven is very hard and 10 is maximum effort. The athletes ran 10km and, every few laps, we asked them to give the ISS team a rating. You can also use the ratings, and its more practical to do so, when asking an athlete to retrospectively give an average number for the overall session.

We also randomised which athletes would do certain sessions. So some people did variable pace on the first day and constant pace on the second day and vice versa. From a scientific point of view, the randomised order was important. Otherwise we cannot isolate the point of the study, in relation to variation, perception and performance. 

How does this translate to events like global championships and the importance of marginal gains?

If myself or you ran 10km and measured our perception of effort it would be a lot higher than those of elite athletes. Your genetic talent and training will reduce that perception of effort. When measuring elite athletes, a 0.4 points difference on the scale is enough to increase/decrease performance in a significant way.

That could be the difference between a personal best/medal or not. That can be considered a marginal gain. The direction of changes of that proportion can induce positive/negative reactions that can make a difference between winning and losing. 

The thing is that if you can reduce perception of effort using psychological effects or things that can stimulate your brain, these gains are more likely to be addictive to your nutrition and training. If you keep targeting something in your brain then youll add it to what you already have as an athlete in terms of lungs, heart and muscles. 

The marginal gains idea can be criticised but focusing on the brain specifically is an area which actually works. Its the mind and the body.